Cross Browser CompatibilityGet Web Design Tips and Tricks on mps-web-design.com. Cross Browser Compatibility topic will increase your understanding on Web Design Tips and Tricks. We at mps-web-design.com only provide news, articles, information in Web Design Tips and Tricks. Web Design Tips and Tricks at mps-web-design.com provides the most up to date news and articles. If you have questions please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sure, it looks great in Internet Explorer 6, but..... A few years ago, there weren't many different versions of web browsers to choose from. Now there are dozens. Actually, there's over 100 different browsers, not counting different versions of the same product. Quite a number of these names I had never heard of before - here's a list of browsers currently available: 1X, Act 10, ActiveBrowser, Active Worlds, Alice, Amaya, ANT Fresco, Arachne, AvantGo, AWeb-II, Beonex Communicator, Browse-X, Charon, Chimera, CipherNet, Clickgarden, CrystalPort, CubicEye, DocZilla, E:ID Frame, Encompass, Enigma, Escape, ezWAP, FairLighHTML Viewer, Fast Browser, Galeon, Go.Web, Grail, Grasshopper V1, Home Page Reader, HotJava, iBrowse, IBrowser, iBrowserPlus, iCab, ICE Browser, I-Comm, iConnecter, InfoScanner, Internet Explorer, IPowerPortal WebBrowser, KBrowser MIPS Edition, KBrowser Palm Edition, Kidnet Explorer, Klondike Web Browser, K-Meleon, Konqueror, Konqueror/Embedded, Links, Lynx, Lynx for Amiga, Micro Digital Browser, Mobile Explorer, Mozilla, MSN Explorer, Multilingual Mosaic, MultiWeb but wait, there's more!...... Neoplanet, Nestor, Netcaptor, NetClue, NetPositive, NetRaider, Netscape, Net-Tamer, Newt's Cape, Nokia Wap Browser, oKID Browser, Oligo, OmniWeb, Openwave Mobile Browser, Opera, Orangotango VirtualBrowser, Oregano, Palmscape, Pendragon Browser, Pixo Internet Microbrowser, Planetweb browser, Pocket Browser, Palm Browser, Pocket IE, ProxiWeb, Q.Bati, RapidBrowser, Safexplorer, SlipKnot, SpeedSeek Portal Solution, SPIN, StarDesktop, TV Interactor, UltraBrowser, ViOS, Voyager, w3m, Wapaka, WAPman, Web, WebsterXL, WebPhace, WebTV, WeMedia Talking Browser, Whack Force, WWW/LX, XBrowser, Yalzer, Yoozee. Choice is a wonderful thing, but the proliferation of browser software has also increased confusion in consumers as to what they should use. It also been the major bugbear of web developers. The good news for developers is that the vast majority of web surfers use either Internet Explorer or Netscape - approximately 95%. The bad news is that there are over 200 flavours of Internet Explorer and Netscape. Web pages can look totally different between the different versions. The common arguement used by web developers to avoid dealing with compatibility issues is that as the percentage of people using Netscape is relatively low, around the 10% mark globally, - it isn't worthwhile taking those users into account. This is probably not a wise way approach the issue, especially for an ecommerce based site. 10% can make a big difference to your bottom line as it's not only Internet Explorer users who buy goods and services online. You may be of the opinion 'my server logs show that only 5 percent of my visitors use Netscape, so I'm not going to bother too much about cross browser compatibility'. Perhaps you would have more Netscape visitors by making some minor changes to your coding that would better present your web material to them. Netscape users also have a tendency to switch to IE from time to time. If they have had a bad experience on your site using Netscape, they may not even bother visiting it again under a different browser. Even if you do target your site to a particular brand of browser; you then need to contend with different versions of that brand. For example; a site designed for IE5.5 may look different under IE4. The simple solution is for everyone to upgrade their browser? True, but who are we to dictate what people use on their systems? Some people do not have the equipment capable to do this. The later versions of Internet Explorer demand massive system resources. The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) has been battling for years for software companies to produce 'compliant' browsers. The idea of compliancy, amongst other things, is to guarantee that a web page looks the same under any browser. Many browsers circulating now are not 'compliant'. Unfortunately, the W3C has had an uphill battle in this but does seem to making some ground. A visit to the W3C site is mind boggling. Many standards that were introduced by this organisation years ago are only just beginning to become accepted. Added to this their tendency to introduce new standards on a regular basis, and the complexity of those standards, I feel that they aren't doing themselves too many favours on the quick uptake of new technologies. On the other end of the scale, much of the software used for producing web sites is notorious for creating non-compliant and garbage code. I use FrontPage, but to combat some of the garbage that it creates, I also utilise Notepad. Cleaner coding also makes your pages more search engine friendly. FrontPage is great for rapid application development, but it contains many features that aren't cross-browser compatible. I have also trialled other major packages, but found the same issues. Once again, the W3C has given many guidelines for software developers to adopt, but the industry is very slow on the uptake. Perhaps the whole process of developing standards needs to be re-examined. While there are many sites that will offer you advice on cross browser compatibility; I still find the best way to deal with the issue is to run a variety of browsers on a system and test pages as they are being developed under various resolutions. Then experiment; with the experimentation will come a great deal of learning.... When first attempting to deal with cross-browser issues on my site, I followed some advice of industry leaders and found the advice to be flawed, and I am still working out the bugs in my major site. A word of warning - if you are running a later version of IE on your system, I would advise against attempting to install an earlier version; it can really mess with your system. The best option in this situation is to view your site from another system, or ask an associate with an earlier version to review your site and to send screen captures if a problem appears. Aim to make your site compatible with all IE and Netscape browsers from version 4 onwards. Ask yourself before implementing that whizz-bang menu system or element that requires a plug-in - 'is it really necessary?'. Most people surf the net for information, not entertainment at this stage - they have a T.V for that. 'Eye Candy' may impress visitors the first time around, but after that if it slows down the performance of your site, it will serve only to annoy them. The exception to this rule of course is if you are developing an entertainment-centric site. If you receive emails from angry visitors stating that your site looks like manure; perhaps instead of disregarding the comments or firing back a retaliatory note, you should investigate by asking for details. It may prove to be a beneficial exercise. The site may be looking fine to you on your system, but perhaps it's not the case with the browsers that some visitors are using. The truth is, tailoring a site for cross browser compatibility is a pain. 'Compliancy' by W3C standards by no means indicates compatibility with all browsers. But the benefits of taking that bit of extra time can pay off in the long run by allowing you to get your message across, or to secure sales from a wider customer base. Michael Bloch michael@tamingthebeast.net http://www.tamingthebeast.net Tutorials, web content and tools, software and community. Web Marketing, eCommerce & Development solutions. _____________________________________________ Copyright information....If you wish to reproduce this article, please acknowledge 'Taming the Beast' by including a hyperlink or reference to the website (www.tamingthebeast.net) & send me an email letting me know. The article must be reproduced in it's entirety & this copyright statement must be included. Thanks. Visit www.tamingthebeast.net to view other great articles FREE for reproduction!
This post was originally published on May 13th, 2004. As others are writing about the topic, I thought bringing it out of the archives would be worthwhile. A little recapThe idea of placing multiple states of buttons and other elements that are used in background images took its roots, I believe, from Pixy's Fast Rollovers. The CSS Zen Master extended this to another purpose in CSS Sprites: Image Slicing’s Kiss of Death. Didier Hilhorst came up with a nice application of this method, and I worked it backwards in Responsible CSS - Recycle your background images. The idea behind the 'sprites' method can obviously be extended to any html element, and there are tangible benefits for doing this, just as long as the designer does his or her usual homework. Benfits of using the 'sprites' methodWhat are the possible the benefits of using this method? Essentially it lies in faster download times for your web content. Readers of Andy Kings book, Speed Up Your Site: Web Site Optimization will notice that this method reduces http requests and makes more efficient use of the data packets used to transfer files to the users computer, and that that is a good thing. Packet size and http requestsFrom Web Page Design and Download Time, by Jing Zhi of Keynote Systems (seen here - pdf), cited in Andy's book:
They also found that it was the number of packets and not necessarily the overall size of the page that was important. If a packet could hold 1460 bytes (the figure given in the article) and your object was 1600 bytes, it would require two packets. They found that this object would transfer at the same speed as another object that was greater in size but still fit in two packets. Potential payoffThe potential payoff for using this method versus individual images, then, is a faster download time due to reduced number of packets and fewer http requests. Reducing http requests is easy. One file instead of two or three etc. is simple. But packet requests? That depends... An exampleThe number of packets sent will depend on the size of the file and the users internet connection. As an example, lets look at the fiftyfoureleven.com logo at the top of the page. When this design was first being coded, that link consisted of two 3.34kb images, one for the link state and one for the hover state. Now, by using one image that contains both states and simply bumping it back and forth depending on the hover state, that has been reduced to one 5.35 kb image. Right there is a savings of 1.33 kb. Good news. Now, for arguments sake lets say that a packet can hold 1460 bytes (packet size for connections greater than 128kb/s = 1500 bytes -40bytes for tcp/ip headers). The two image method used 6 packets, 3 for each image (3.34/1.46, rounded up). The single image method uses 4 packets (5.34/1.46, rounded up). Things are looking good. How to optimizeIn his alistapart article, Dave refers to the image that holds all of the sprites as his 'master image'. The key to benefitting from this method is to ensure that the file size of your master image isn't a bloated equivalent versus the sum of its pieces. ConclusionGreat benefits can be realized when combining a master image from slices that fall well below the size of one packet, as that unused packet space goes wasted. After doing a little more research, it seems that packet size can vary depending on the connection rate. That being said, it may be rather difficult to come up with a firm rule here. To play it smart and safe, try and:
This isn't exactly groundbreaking advice, however having seen the results acheived with the logo on this page, it can be seen that using the sprite method versus individual images at minimum does reduce http requests and even further it can reduce file size which in turn can reduce the number of packets sent. Article Index: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 |
More Articles:1. Is Your Web Site Too Hard? Is your website too hard?Take the “Easy Test” to see if your website is as visitor friendly as it should be! Websites often fail to produce the desired results. This can be because visitors find them too hard to understand or navigate. Here are some potential usability problems to avoid. 1.Hard to find Is your website easy to locate? Do you promote it everywhere, (i.e. business cards, invoices, envelopes, etc.) and is your site search engine friendly? Do you promote the benefits of visiting? Is … 2. Fast Web Design For The Skint Webmaster By T. O' Donnell About two years ago, I had a go at commercial web site design. I put a medium-sized ad in a London classified ad paper. Nothing fancy: "Web designer seeks work ..." etc. This was expensive, about £500 for a month's run.Got a few replies. Lesson number one: advertise where clients of the calibre you want will see it. The clients I got thought £300 was a lot for a web site. They didn't want to pay web hosting. They wanted a lot of bang for their buck. 'Mission creep' was a term I grew to know an… 3. Color Psychology in Marketing By Al Martinovic On the internet we don't deal with face to face selling. The internet is a visual and psychological medium. The words, or sales copy, on your website have by far the greatest psychological impact on your visitors and thus becomes your most important communication and sales tool.But another important psychological aspect of your website that is often overlooked are the colors. Yes, that's right... I said colors.Just as you use words to express yourself, colors can be used as an expression as we… 4. Tips for Choosing a Web Developer You've put it off long enough! It's time for action! You are finally going to put your business on the Internet! Congratulations, you now have joined the ranks of thousands who have absolutely no idea what to do next! Who do you call? What will it cost? How do you find a company to develop your site for you? Who do you trust? Where do you start?If this seems overwhelming, you are not alone. However, there are things you can do to minimize risk and to make the process less daunting. Your first st… |
||||
